The lineup I'd like to see

[guapo34]

I suggest you read this sentence again...

 

Thus, a higher correlation means the statistic in question leads to runs more often than the lower correlated statistic.

 

I'm talking about frequency, not magnitude. Higher correlation means it is closer to linear, which means the higher correlated number results in runs at a higher frequency.

 

So how do you argue that a slightly higher correlation means OBP isn't more important than slugging? The two have nothing to do with each other.

[gosox34]

I don't care about walks. Last time I checked, a hit was better than a walk.

[KeepTheFaith1229]

I don't care about walks. Last time I checked, a hit was better than a walk.

 

 

No, an extra base hit is better than a walk. As long as you're on first base, I don't care how you got there.

[ORS]

So how do you argue that a slightly higher correlation means OBP isn't more important than slugging? The two have nothing to do with each other.

Do I even need to? Isn't the fact that it correlates to runs better telling enough? Personally, since OPS has the highest correlation (other than advanced metrics like EqA, BaseRuns) I use it primarily over either.

[guapo34]

Do I even need to? Isn't the fact that it correlates to runs better telling enough? Personally, since OPS has the highest correlation (other than advanced metrics like EqA, BaseRuns) I use it primarily over either.

 

No, its not telling enough. Singles correlate better than grand slams. That doesn't mean they lead to more runs. A higher OBP leads to more runs than SLG. Its a generally accepted fact among people who study these things. The person that did that study for BP would say the exact same thing.

[seabeachfred]

Guapo, switch Loretta and Youk and there you have it. Other than that, I'm in accord. One more thing. I hope on this website we aren't going to be stuck down in the mud with all the trade rumors some people have fashioned on Dirt Dogs and the Red Sox website. We are set for the season; we should be concentrating on Spring Training and getting our team set----not finding ways to trade Manny for this or that.

[ORS]

No, its not telling enough. Singles correlate better than grand slams. That doesn't mean they lead to more runs. A higher OBP leads to more runs than SLG. Its a generally accepted fact among people who study these things. The person that did that study for BP would say the exact same thing.

Singles correlate more than GS because a GS is a pretty rare event.

 

If higher OBP lead to more runs, then it would correlate higher. The writer of that article was Clay Davenport, probably the best statistical mind at BP. He took team statistics from 1871 - 2003, found the baseline (league average BA/OBP/SLG/OPS and Runs per PA) and compared each teams rate stats to the league average. Teams with a higher SLG produced more R/PA at a higher rate than OBP did.

 

I don't see why this is so hard to understand. Please explain how OBP is more important if SLG correlates more. I've shown you numbers and explained where they came from and what they mean; you have said, "Everyone who studies stats says OBP leads to more runs", and posted a link to an report that just scaled SLG to OBP for run production.

[SchillingIsTheNatural]

Guapo, switch Loretta and Youk and there you have it. Other than that, I'm in accord. One more thing. I hope on this website we aren't going to be stuck down in the mud with all the trade rumors some people have fashioned on Dirt Dogs and the Red Sox website. We are set for the season; we should be concentrating on Spring Training and getting our team set----not finding ways to trade Manny for this or that.

 

We have too many pitchers. I don't think we are set.

[TheRivernator]

We have too many pitchers

 

 

wait, so you say I need to "do some research" or else I'll get picked apart, then you come out with this asinine statement. Solid work schills, I see your logic equals your SN's namesake....

[guapo34]

Singles correlate more than GS because a GS is a pretty rare event.

 

If higher OBP lead to more runs, then it would correlate higher. The writer of that article was Clay Davenport, probably the best statistical mind at BP. He took team statistics from 1871 - 2003, found the baseline (league average BA/OBP/SLG/OPS and Runs per PA) and compared each teams rate stats to the league average. Teams with a higher SLG produced more R/PA at a higher rate than OBP did.

 

I don't see why this is so hard to understand. Please explain how OBP is more important if SLG correlates more. I've shown you numbers and explained where they came from and what they mean; you have said, "Everyone who studies stats says OBP leads to more runs", and posted a link to an report that just scaled SLG to OBP for run production.

 

How can you say, "if a higher OBP lead to more runs, then it would correlate higher." when you've admitted correlation has nothing to do with magnitude. One person that agrees with me, Paul Depodesta. Billy Beane used him to judge exactly this sort of thing, and he concluded OBP is 3 times more important. This is found in Moneyball.

 

I'm not arguing with Clay Davenport. Nowhere in his article does he say a player with a 300 obp and a 400 slg is more valuable than a player with a 400 obp and a 300 slg. I'm sure he knows thats not true.

[TheRivernator]

How can you say, "if a higher OBP lead to more runs, then it would correlate higher." when you've admitted correlation has nothing to do with magnitude. One person that agrees with me, Paul Depodesta. Billy Beane used him to judge exactly this sort of thing, and he concluded OBP is 3 times more important. This is found in Moneyball.

 

I'm not arguing with Clay Davenport. Nowhere in his article does he say a player with a 300 obp and a 400 slg is more valuable than a player with a 400 obp and a 300 slg. I'm sure he knows thats not true.

 

hate to get into your argument, but moneyball has not really won Billy Beane anything. He has had his pick of players and yet his team's offenses seem to be putrid every single yr. You need a good mix, if you have all OBP, then you wont be driving in runs, you'll just have a lot of guys on. If you have no OBP but all SLG then when you get an extra base hit, nobody will be on to score. It is all a balance. If you want to see the perfect balance, go back and look at the 2003 red sox lineup. That lineup was dirty and was loaded with OBP and SLG throughout. They worked pitchers, they killed bullpens, they got on base, and they scored runs. I disagree that SLG or OBP are any more important than the other, no matter what any pencil pusher says....

[KeepTheFaith1229]

wait, so you say I need to "do some research" or else I'll get picked apart, then you come out with this asinine statement. Solid work schills, I see your logic equals your SN's namesake....

 

You're not going to have to do too much research to figure out that we have too many pitchers. Shut up.

[TheRivernator]

You're not going to have to do too much research to figure out that we have too many pitchers. Shut up.

 

having too many pitchers is NEVER a bad thing....

[KeepTheFaith1229]

having too many pitchers is NEVER a bad thing....

 

Actually it can be, if there's trade oppurtunities for better players and you have a lot of pitchers anyway. Also it can be when you're trying to make room in the rotation for young guys like Papelbon.

[ksushi]

Sorry but not even close

 

Damon

Jeter

Arod

Sheffield

Giambi

 

Theres a chance for 100-200 HRs just out of their top 5.

 

 

NOTE: Guys I know we got Coco and we're all excited, but lets stop pretending he's going to make this lineup better than it was with Damon.

 

Coco and Damon will put up very similar numbers next year. Damon isn't god. I know he was cool and all but come off of it because he isnt the best lead off guy in the game. I'll take Jeter and Loretta could be a push but either one could prove to be better than the other. Jeter has more intangibles obviously, but I think Loretta will put up slightly better numbers at the plate. I'll take Ortiz over A-rod and I'll take Manny over Sheff anyday and that leaves only the five hitter that they up us on but since our pitching staff and defense makes up for it, I don't think I'll lose much sleep.

[TheRivernator]

Actually it can be, if there's trade oppurtunities for better players and you have a lot of pitchers anyway. Also it can be when you're trying to make room in the rotation for young guys like Papelbon.

 

If you have trade opportunities for other players, then having extra pitching is great because you can pawn it off. How is having the extra pitching detrimental in that case? Also, with Pap, you wont have to rush him into the rotation and he can ease his way into his first full season in the bigs.....

[Cityofchampions33]

Only good reason about having all this above average pitching is because we can trad ethem for young talent/spare parts however that doesn't seem to be working as of now.

[KeepTheFaith1229]

If you have trade opportunities for other players, then having extra pitching is great because you can pawn it off. How is having the extra pitching detrimental in that case? Also, with Pap, you wont have to rush him into the rotation and he can ease his way into his first full season in the bigs.....

 

 

You misunderstood me. What I meant was it would be bad to have pitchers sitting on the bench when you can trade them for key components and when they are blocking Pap. Papelbon is ready, and I'd like to see him start out in the rotation.

[ORS]

hate to get into your argument, but moneyball has not really won Billy Beane anything. He has had his pick of players and yet his team's offenses seem to be putrid every single yr. You need a good mix, if you have all OBP, then you wont be driving in runs, you'll just have a lot of guys on. If you have no OBP but all SLG then when you get an extra base hit, nobody will be on to score. It is all a balance. If you want to see the perfect balance, go back and look at the 2003 red sox lineup. That lineup was dirty and was loaded with OBP and SLG throughout. They worked pitchers, they killed bullpens, they got on base, and they scored runs. I disagree that SLG or OBP are any more important than the other, no matter what any pencil pusher says....

This is why I've said all along, they are equally important. Actually, their sum is more important than either.

[ORS]

How can you say, "if a higher OBP lead to more runs, then it would correlate higher." when you've admitted correlation has nothing to do with magnitude. One person that agrees with me, Paul Depodesta. Billy Beane used him to judge exactly this sort of thing, and he concluded OBP is 3 times more important. This is found in Moneyball.

 

I'm not arguing with Clay Davenport. Nowhere in his article does he say a player with a 300 obp and a 400 slg is more valuable than a player with a 400 obp and a 300 slg. I'm sure he knows thats not true.

It's pretty easy to see how I can say if a higher OBP lead to more runs it would correlate higher. If it lead to more runs, then more teams with above average OBP would also have above average R/PA, which would make the correlation factor higher.

 

400/300 vs. 300/400? Both players suck because their OPS+ would be around 95, and that blows. The discussion got started by talking about Youk's stats, so lets look at his .805 OPS (.400/.405) from last year. Lyle Overbay's OPS is similar at .816 (.367/.449). Which bat would you rather have for 1B next year? Overbay would be my choice.

[Redguitar985]

You misunderstood me. What I meant was it would be bad to have pitchers sitting on the bench when you can trade them for key components and when they are blocking Pap. Papelbon is ready, and I'd like to see him start out in the rotation.

 

Yeah, I mean, does he really need any easing in? I figured that's what last year was for.

[guapo34]

hate to get into your argument, but moneyball has not really won Billy Beane anything. He has had his pick of players and yet his team's offenses seem to be putrid every single yr. You need a good mix, if you have all OBP, then you wont be driving in runs, you'll just have a lot of guys on. If you have no OBP but all SLG then when you get an extra base hit, nobody will be on to score. It is all a balance. If you want to see the perfect balance, go back and look at the 2003 red sox lineup. That lineup was dirty and was loaded with OBP and SLG throughout. They worked pitchers, they killed bullpens, they got on base, and they scored runs. I disagree that SLG or OBP are any more important than the other, no matter what any pencil pusher says....

 

 

Completely wrong. Brian Cashman has had his pick of players. Billy Beane is forced to adjust every year because he has one of the cheapest owners in baseball. He had to trade Tim Hudson and Mark Mulder because he was about to lose them and get nothing in return. He lost Jason Giambi, Johnny Damon, Keith Foulke, and Miguel Tejada becuase they didn't have hte money to sign them. He put a team together that made the post season four years in a row despite having the lowest payroll in his division. Every one of those years They won the division. Last year their good young SS got hurt and their offense fell apart, but they'll have a good offense this year. They lost in the post season all those years in 5 game series. There is a lot of luck that goes into a 5 game series.

 

You can't be serious.